Joined: 24 Jan 2006, 21:12 Location: There is no god - and reality is his prophetess
Yeah, evil 3,141Ratz enemy of all DiceCats, cubism beeing 4ever the opposeSum of all sphereOfInfluenzas.
You know how it is with farmers? Free market when the prices fall, state controlled food distribution if the prices rise and the poor starve (oops free markets invisible hands not so invisible when it grabs you in the guts, and you start throwing stones)
Now after the panem, lets go for the circensis... do you really think it is in the interest of the state to see people unentertained, bored? Definutly not. Thats why TV in most states is for free. Opium for the masses. So you get basically some half assed protectionism, keeping the fat cats (EA & Co) alive.
But you are on steam, therefore protected yourself. So why do you whine for pirats? Nobody stealin your stuff. So you just bash them because not enough success against the marketing divisions of the Giants, whose shoulders you stand upon?
Envy boiling deep within, because people pay 1/10 of the price for your masterpiece, for a 50 line app? Oh, those evil Piratz, disregarding my love of strife with wild disregard, while payin for the plain. Roar, here my rage, mighty Dizecat i am!
So, if i cant have people employed in the gamesindustry, at least the lawyerz shall be well fed. And the Feds shall be well fed. Fuck you Picasso, im here for a Rant, not for constructive problem solving!
Nah, I'm not using any DRM. Also, the problem at this point is not even piracy, but the commercialized piracy whereby the pirate site earns very good money ($1 for every $100 of damage it causes is still good money).
I've contributed a fair bit of free code to springlobby and spring. I also donated 3000$ (coming from my game's sales) to GLFW, free software I rely on, for buying new computer several times 'cause the maintainer is poor. I also send the patches i make to developers of relevant libraries. Did you ever contribute anything to free software? No? Then shut up.
Your contribution was never in question. Insecure?
dizekat wrote:
There's kids starving in Africa. There's also born-rich greedy kids in developed countries who don't want to pay one kind of immaterial bits (money in bank account) for other kind of immaterial bits (software) so that they can get more 'material' toys, made by kids their age in Chinese factories - working 14 hours a day inhaling toxic fumes and whatnot.
Support of argument by unrelated data meant to play on emotions.
dizekat wrote:
Nah, I'm not using any DRM.
dizekat wrote:
released some game (spring unrelated) on Steam successfully
Steam is DRM.
dizekat wrote:
Also, the problem at this point is not even piracy, but the commercialized piracy whereby the pirate site earns very good money ($1 for every $100 of damage it causes is still good money).
Joined: 24 Jan 2006, 21:12 Location: There is no god - and reality is his prophetess
Why dont you anonNymously get a PieRate Site Up yourself? That way you could have the addIncome of the pirats + the steamSales, you could even pretend the battles of law, without having to pay any lawyer. Ultimate win appRoaches.
I've contributed a fair bit of free code to springlobby and spring. I also donated 3000$ (coming from my game's sales) to GLFW, free software I rely on, for buying new computer several times 'cause the maintainer is poor. I also send the patches i make to developers of relevant libraries. Did you ever contribute anything to free software? No? Then shut up.
Your contribution was never in question. Insecure?
It was just for your information on what the control over copying of my non free stuff (which I'll eventually open-source anyway) means for free stuff. It means more free stuff. And also more nonfree stuff.
Quote:
dizekat wrote:
There's kids starving in Africa. There's also born-rich greedy kids in developed countries who don't want to pay one kind of immaterial bits (money in bank account) for other kind of immaterial bits (software) so that they can get more 'material' toys, made by kids their age in Chinese factories - working 14 hours a day inhaling toxic fumes and whatnot.
Support of argument by unrelated data meant to play on emotions.
That's description of the situation with copyright on games in particular. I'm sorry if the reality plays on your emotions. And money in bank are as much immaterial bits as software.
Quote:
dizekat wrote:
Nah, I'm not using any DRM.
dizekat wrote:
released some game (spring unrelated) on Steam successfully
Steam is DRM.
Nah, the DRM is entirely optional. Many games (most indie titles i'd say) can be bought and downloaded via Steam and then run without Steam, edit: and copied around between computers, et cetera.
Quote:
One copy equals one lost sale fallacy.
I'm assuming it equals around 0.1 lost sale. It can also equate to gain in sales, but not when people just pirate without having to ask around and talk to eachother.
edit: and on topic of artists wanting to keep their little gems to themselves, that's not so. Pretty much all artists want to show their art to people. But they also want to make more art instead of doing some mundane non-art job, and that nowadays involves trading their immaterial bits for some of immaterial bits in people's bank accounts. And please don't even try to argue that you should be more entitled to your immaterial bits than I am to immaterial bits i made.
And of course there's abuses - RIAA are not artists, they didn't make their immaterial bits, and record companies often neglect to pay the artist their revenue share, which is the worst kind of piracy.
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 03:36 Location: your imagination
Congress cares and will do nothing for little indie games, it is supporting the big media giants and their lobbyists.
Basically, it's not what the bill says, it's what it doesn't say. It allows a broad interpretation of what 'infringing content' is, and how websites are responsible for the actions of their users.
Imagine someone posts a funny picture:
Infringing Disney content. Shut. Down.Everything.
Sites like youtube mostly do remove infringing content, but it is impossible to be 100% perfect. This bill will be the end of video sharing, image sharing, social media, forums, anything where people are free to potentially post 'infringing content'.
luckywaldo7: That's actually no change from the current state of affairs with DMCA. If site hosting that disney pic gets served DMCA notice (by Disney) right now and does not comply, it can be held responsible. http://gigaom.com/2011/11/27/with-frien ... eeds-sopa/
Regarding responsibility (and contrary to the article i linked btw), just like DMCA, for the site owner to be responsible it has to be knowing and wilful infringement on the site owner's part (that's NOT easy to prove!), plus the site owner is off the hook if prevention of infringement is overly expensive. What I expect to happen is that SOPA requests will work the same as DMCA requests do, with very minor differences and somewhat wider applicability (you could now also send requests to the ad networks and payment services). I don't see how SOPA removes the DMCA's safe harbour.
Quoting the SOPA:
Quote:
8 (B) PROCEDURES 9 (i) SHOW AND RELIEF.— CAUSE ORDER.—On a show- 10 ing by the qualifying plaintiff of probable 11 cause to believe that an entity served with 12 a copy of a court order issued under sub- 13 section (c) has not complied with its obli- 14 gations under this subsection by reason of 15 such court order, the court shall require 16 the entity to show cause why an order 17 should not issue— 18 (I) to require compliance with the 19 obligations of this subsection; and 20 (II) to impose an appropriate 21 monetary sanction, consistent with the 22 court’s exercise of its equitable au- 23 thority, to enforce compliance with its 24 lawful orders, if the entity— f:\VHLC\102611\102611.161.xml October 26, 2011 (3:39 p.m.) VerDate Nov 24 2008 15:39 Oct 26, 2011 Jkt 000000 (511202|2) PO 00000 Frm 00042 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\SLSTROKOFF\APPLICATION DATA\SOFTQUAD\XMET F:\M12\SMITTX\SMITTX_056.XML 43 1 (aa) has knowingly and will- 2 fully failed to file a certification 3 required by paragraph (1)(B); 4 (bb) has filed such a certifi- 5 cation agreeing to comply but 6 has knowingly and willfully failed 7 to do so; or 8 (cc) has knowingly and will- 9 fully certified falsely that compli- 10 ance with the requirements of 11 paragraph (2) is not required by 12 law. 13 (ii) SERVICE OF PROCESS.—The order 14 to show cause, and any other process, may 15 be served in any judicial district where the 16 entity resides or may be found. 17 (C) DEFENSE.—An entity against whom 18 relief is sought under subparagraph (B) may 19 establish an affirmative defense by showing that 20 the entity does not have the technical means to 21 comply with this subsection without incurring 22 an unreasonable economic burden, or that the 23 order is not authorized by this subsection. Such 24 showing shall not be presumed to be a complete 25 defense but shall serve as a defense only for f:\VHLC\102611\102611.161.xml October 26, 2011 (3:39 p.m.) VerDate Nov 24 2008 15:39 Oct 26, 2011 Jkt 000000 (511202|2) PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\SLSTROKOFF\APPLICATION DATA\SOFTQUAD\XMET F:\M12\SMITTX\SMITTX_056.XML 44 1 those measures for which a technical limitation 2 on compliance is demonstrated or for such por- 3 tions of the order as are demonstrated to be un- 4 authorized by this subsection.
5 (5) IMMUNITY.— 6 (A) IMMUNITY FROM SUIT.—Other than in 7 an action pursuant to paragraph (4), no cause 8 of action shall lie in any Federal or State court 9 or administrative agency against any entity 10 served with a copy of a court order issued 11 under subsection (c), or against any director, 12 officer, employee, or agent thereof, for any act 13 reasonably designed to comply with this sub- 14 section or reasonably arising from such order. 15 (B) IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY.—Other 16 than in an action pursuant to paragraph (4)— 17 (i) any entity served with a copy of an 18 order under this subsection, and any direc- 19 tor, officer, employee, or agent thereof, 20 shall not be liable for any acts reasonably 21 designed to comply with this subsection or 22 reasonably arising from such order; and 23 (ii) any— 24 (I) actions taken by customers of 25 such entity to circumvent any restric- f:\VHLC\102611\102611.161.xml October 26, 2011 (3:39 p.m.) VerDate Nov 24 2008 15:39 Oct 26, 2011 Jkt 000000 (511202|2) PO 00000 Frm 00044 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\SLSTROKOFF\APPLICATION DATA\SOFTQUAD\XMET F:\M12\SMITTX\SMITTX_056.XML 45 1 tion on access to the Internet site, or 2 portion thereof that is subject to such 3 order, that is instituted pursuant to 4 this subsection, or 5 (II) act, failure, or inability to re- 6 strict access to an Internet site or 7 portion thereof that is subject to such 8 order, despite good faith efforts to 9 comply with such order by such enti- 10 ty, 11 shall not be used by any person in any 12 claim or cause of action against such enti- 13 ty.
edit: geez your US laws sure ARE verbose. A little wonder nobody reads them and everyone just claims stuff baselessly.
Joined: 24 Jan 2006, 21:12 Location: There is no god - and reality is his prophetess
It all started out as a small war against some smugglers, but in the end a evil empire arose. And they fought heavily ever. Srsly. Napster. dir<Rate>bay. Has anyone ever succeded when the people voting with there feet stompeded the Stupid?
Joined: 23 Nov 2005, 06:16 Location: Dunedin, New Zealand
dizekat wrote:
Das Bruce: I'm the guy who been contributing to SL (mostly) and to Spring (some) and then released some game (spring unrelated) on Steam successfully. Not Yan. Who the hell are you though?
I know, the beta gave me motion sickness. I was refering to Degenerated5.
just saying, the us and china isn't the only one..
I never said the UK government was doing the right thing, I'm not aware of a single government that is taking steps forward that aren't in the pockets of the media bribers.
Das Bruce: I'm the guy who been contributing to SL (mostly) and to Spring (some) and then released some game (spring unrelated) on Steam successfully. Not Yan. Who the hell are you though?
I know, the beta gave me motion sickness. I was refering to Degenerated5.
Ahh ok. I have been away for way too long and I confused Yan with the guy (Argh) who was making/releasing some commercial mod with Spring, because of some other Yan i know who is really similar to Argh in many ways. I'm terrible with names; i tend to remember people but not their names.
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 03:36 Location: your imagination
dizekat wrote:
What I expect to happen is that SOPA requests will work the same as DMCA requests do, with very minor differences and somewhat wider applicability (you could now also send requests to the ad networks and payment services). I don't see how SOPA removes the DMCA's safe harbour.
Ha, minor differences, like
Quote:
(i) IN GENERAL.—A service provider shall take technically feasible and reason- able measures designed to prevent access by its subscribers located within the United States to the foreign infringing site (or portion thereof) that is subject to the order, including measures designed to pre- vent the domain name of the foreign in- fringing site (or portion thereof) from re- solving to that domain name’s Internet Protocol address. Such actions shall be taken as expeditiously as possible, but in any case within 5 days after being served with a copy of the order, or within such time as the court may order.
U.S. is the new china!
Add to that:
Quote:
SEC. 104. IMMUNITY FOR TAKING VOLUNTARY ACTION AGAINST SITES DEDICATED TO THEFT OF U.S. PROPERTY. No cause of action shall lie in any Federal or State court or administrative agency against, no person may rely in any claim or cause of action against, and no liability for damages to any person shall be granted against, a service provider, payment network provider, Internet ad- vertising service, advertiser, Internet search engine, do- main name registry, or domain name registrar for taking any action described in section 102(c)(2), section 103(d)(2), or section 103(b) with respect to an Internet site, or otherwise voluntarily blocking access to or ending financial affiliation with an Internet site, in the reasonable belief that— (1) the Internet site is a foreign infringing site or is an Internet site dedicated to theft of U.S. prop- erty; and (2) the action is consistent with the entity’s terms of service or other contractual rights.
You can't sue your service provider for wrongfully blocking a site as long as they believe it has infringing content. Basically there is nothing to force them to look at proof that it is legitimate and unblock it.
Of course, you don't live in the US so you probably don't care about any of this.
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 03:36 Location: your imagination
Double post because no one else is posting.
Quote:
(C) PAYMENT (i) NETWORK PROVIDERS.— PREVENTING AFFILIATION.—A payment network provider shall take tech- nically feasible and reasonable measures, as expeditiously as possible, but in any case within 5 days after being served with a copy of the order, or within such time as the court may order, designed to prevent, prohibit, or suspend its service from com- pleting payment transactions involving cus- tomers located within the United States or subject to the jurisdiction of the United States and the payment account—
Doesn't sound like payment services get sent requests, sounds like they are sent orders. FYI, this is the same technique that has brought wikileaks to a halt:
That's describing a court order. And still, the ISP does not have to comply if complying is too expensive.
Quote:
(C) DEFENSE.—An entity against whom 18 relief is sought under subparagraph (B) may 19 establish an affirmative defense by showing that 20 the entity does not have the technical means to 21 comply with this subsection without incurring 22 an unreasonable economic burden, or that the 23 order is not authorized by this subsection. Such 24 showing shall not be presumed to be a complete 25 defense but shall serve as a defense only for f:\VHLC\102611\102611.161.xml October 26, 2011 (3:39 p.m.) VerDate Nov 24 2008 15:39 Oct 26, 2011 Jkt 000000 (511202|2) PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\SLSTROKOFF\APPLICATION DATA\SOFTQUAD\XMET F:\M12\SMITTX\SMITTX_056.XML 44 1 those measures for which a technical limitation 2 on compliance is demonstrated or for such por- 3 tions of the order as are demonstrated to be un- 4 authorized by this subsection.
Re: payments, I think it is ridiculous actually that right now the wikileaks can be prevented from getting payments, whereas the pirate site could not. I'd rather the methods used against wikileaks be used against commercial pirate sites. It won't even kill the piracy, it'd merely make it unprofitable to the point that things won't be pirated on the launch day any more.
Also i'm pretty sure you guys will always be able to use proxies and otherwise circumvent this shit, it's simply that piracy will no longer be easier than looking for your credit card number and entering omfg 16 digits such long number. Which is the biggest f***n problem really with the piracy. Pirating is just flat-out easier for the consumer than purchasing can ever be, because purchasing will always involve some sort of authentication, whereas piracy don't need that.
I totally expect SOPA to be entirely ineffective at preventing the piracy, but i'd think it could raise the bar a little bit if you guys would have to use proxies.
edit: there's much more scary bits in SOPA, not related to piracy but to "protection of public health", which can be very broadly interpreted to censor dissenting views on health issues.
Ahh and for more balanced view I agree here's of course a lot of the dumb stuff to blame piracy for. If you made an independent movie, and you are selling physical, boxed DVDs online, it is no big surprise that with piracy nobody buys your DVDs because buying physical DVDs suck plus you suck big time for polluting the environment with DVDs and boxes and delivery. But on other hand, it's hard not to get pissed when the purchase is as simple and streamlined as it could be, and yet the piracy is still a tiny bit easier because seller will need to know who you are and pirate won't. And people just go for easier solution.
dize: proxies and VPN will be illegal (and all unknown traffic will be blocked)
i guess i didn't really make myself clear in my first post; it's not so much the blocking of pirated material that bothers me but the blanket statements like you mentioned at the end of your last post similar to "protecting the public health" and the like; this opens the door for them to do what they did to wikileaks any time they like, and without the affected party having any type of recourse available
a reminder : it's legal for me to download whatever i like in my country, as long as i don't share it, however, i am within the sphere of influence of the united states, which will be interfering with MY rights and freedoms, even though i live in a different country altogether.
and no, i didn't pirate your game. any indy game i want to play, i will buy, because i understand the difference between feeding a hard worker and feeding a corporation (i suppose this is a completely different discussion altogether but i would like to at least state my viewpoint)
will the impact be less for you? yes, because you'll still be able to connect to sites without routing through the united states. however, since payment services are international corporations, and all of them have at least ties to the united states as a whole, this puts your business in peril... if your site/company was taken down tomorrow for a copyright infringement (false of course) would you have the resources to fly to the united states and plead your case in the courts there? would you be able to hire a lawyer? would you be able to pay the legal fees, or even cover the auto-sue that you incur by protesting the violation? even if you can afford all of this, can you afford to spend that much time in court, away from your work?
this is the big problem. if there is ANY policing of the internet IMO it should be done by the ICC, not a court in US jurisdiction, but of course they do not recognize international law.
hoijui maybe hit the nail on the head about re-routing, but if you look at the undersea cables connecting continents together via data, you'll see there is (one? am i wrong?) cable attaching from Europe to Africa to south america... comparing this with the jumbled tangle of many cables reaching across the Atlantic from the USA to Europe, it's hard to imagine what an internet with the USA removed would be like... slow as molasses i would hazard a guess.
this is not simply a matter of "omg i can't pirate anymore"... five minutes from my house i can buy warez and appz burned onto CD for $5 apiece; in some instances it's quicker to just go there and buy one rather than torrent in the first place. this is more a matter of the USA reaching outside of their borders and policing the rest of the world, as spliff stated (albiet bluntly) earlier in the thread
edit: anyone got a spare 5000 miles of ethernet cable?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
Home
Download
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
